Why I’m Not Voting for Biden
It’s the Policies Not the Person
A list of Biden policies, in no particular order, nor are they exhaustive. Bulleted items intersect as noted.
Summation:
- Opposition to Charter Schools
- Despite evidence of their educational success
- Reverses prior support of successful program
- Aligned with teacher unions not students. - The Equality Act
- Repeal Religious Liberty Protections under RFRA
- No appeal to RFRA by individuals, businesses, educational or religious institutions
- No conscience protections for traditional religious views.
- Women’s rights threatened
- No women-only shelters, prisons, sports
- Dissent from transgender ideology criminalised. - The Hyde Amendment
- Enforced tax-payer subsidised abortion
- No conscience protections for any abortion-opposed
- Biden policy conflicts with Catholic Church stance. - Religious Liberty
- Conscience protections dissolved (see above)
- Force religious organisations (e.g., Little Sisters of the Poor) into moral compromise
- Catholic faith in conflict with policies
- Stated policy aims ignore Church concerns. - Social Justice
- Reinstatement of Obama-era policies
— E.g., Failed Educational Guidance:
— Dilution of discipline in public schools
— Fostered dangerous and violent educational environments
— Policy facilitated tragic school shooting.
- Wide-ranging Biden plan to implement Obama-era policies analogous to above example:
— Education, Business, Industry, Government
— Collaborative effort with Bernie Sanders.
- Embrace of ‘Diversity, Inclusion Equity’ Mechanisms:
— Accepts premise of systemic racism in all Western Societies
— Imposition of questionable ideology (Critical Theory)
— — — — — — —
- Charter Schools / Educational Choice
All democratic candidates declared their opposition at a forum earlier this year, apparently due to pressure from teacher unions:
“[Charter Schools are] at odds with teachers unions, who argued that charter schools diverted resources from traditional public schools. The National Education Association [NEA], one of the biggest unions, even called on then-Education Secretary Arne Duncan to resign at one point (link).”
NEA site lists ‘dangers’ of charter schools particularly ‘weak oversight:’
“As taxpayer-funded schools, charter schools must be held to the same safeguards and high standards of accountability, transparency and equity as public schools (link).”
Above statement regarding ‘equity’ intersects with item ‘Critical Race Theory / Social Justice’ (see below). NEA endorses Biden (link).
Biden formerly supported charter schools — publicly funded charter schools — since the public schools were failing (ca. 2001):
“in fact, that is what choice is all about, public charter schools. You create a charter school because you don’t think that the school down the street, which is doing the public school work — and they are both public schools, by the way; I am not talking private schools here — but you create a public charter school because you think the public school down the street is not doing such a good job (link).”
During the above mentioned forum Biden declared,
‘And so, the point is, if I’m president, [Education Secretary] Betsy De Vos’ whole notion from charter schools to this are gone,” Biden said during the forum (link).’
Counterpoint to NEA stance on charter schools:
‘14 percent of traditional public-school classes had a majority of their students achieve a level defined as “proficient” in English for their grade level by the New York State Education Department…Meanwhile, 65 percent of charter-school classes in those same buildings had a majority of their students achieve the “proficient“ level on the same test. That’s nearly a five-to-one disparity. On the mathematics test, just 10 percent of the classes in these traditional public schools had a majority of their students achieve a “proficient” level. But 68 percent of charter-school classes in the same buildings had a majority of their students achieve a “proficient” level. That’s nearly a seven-to-one disparity.’
— Thomas Sowell, from (link) citing his book Charter Schools and Their Enemies (link).
Myriad observations relate conflict of interest between teacher unions and student education, e.g.:
“The teacher union exists to protect the interest of its members — as perceived by the union bosses. Sometimes those bosses’ efforts come at the expense of the students — the very individuals the teachers are employed to help (link).”
— — — — — — —
2. The Equality Act
Biden declarations of support:
“In addition to enacting the Equality Act, Biden will take action using his executive authority. He will immediately reverse the discriminatory actions of the Trump-Pence Administration and then go further to end discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals.”
“Biden will make enactment of the Equality Act during his first 100 days as President a top legislative priority. Biden will also direct his Cabinet to ensure immediate and full enforcement of the Equality Act across all federal departments and agencies (link).”
Speech to LGBT activist group Human Rights Campaign, June 2019:
“We need the Equality Act that just passed the house…we need to elect a Democratic Senate that will pass it…I promise you if I’m elected president that will be the first thing I ask to be done (link).“
Religious Liberty Concerns
Legal scholar studying interface between LGBT and religious liberty rights, Prof. Douglas Laycock (author of Religious Freedom LBGT Rights and the Prospects for Common Ground; see link) states in interview:
“It goes very far to stamp out religious exemptions…It regulates religious non-profits. And then it says that [the Religious Freedom Restoration Act] does not apply to any claim under the Equality Act. This would be the first time Congress has limited the reach of RFRA. This is not a good-faith attempt to reconcile competing interests. It is an attempt by one side to grab all the disputed territory and to crush the other side (link).”
The Equality Act criticised here (ca 2015):
“The Equality Act has enormous repercussions for religious liberty, free speech, and freedom of conscience, especially in education, public accommodation, employment, and federal funding… The bill goes out of its way to strip away any notion of religious liberty by audaciously stipulating that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) cannot be appealed to by individuals, businesses, educational institutions, or religious institutions.”
“Were this bill to become law, traditional Christian, Jewish, and Muslim sexual morality would immediately be treated as suspect and contrary to federal law…The Equality Act instead paves over the consciences of those who cannot in good faith condone conduct they believe to be immoral by providing services for a same-sex wedding ceremony. Again, such conflicts arise not over the personhood and dignity of an LGBT customer, but over participation in particular conduct that some find morally unacceptable (link).”
Women’s Rights Concerns
Feminist activist Julia Beck states:
“If the act passes in its current form as H.R. 5, then every right that women have fought for will cease to exist,” Beck warned. “H.R. 5 is a human rights violation. Every single person in this country will lose their right to single-sex sports, shelters, grants, and loans. The law will forbid ever distinguishing between women and men.”
‘The Equality Act will make dissent from transgender identity illegal. “Making gender identity the law will, in fact, mandate a belief in a female penis or female testes,” Beck warned. “Deep down, I believe you have good intentions, but gender identity only does harm.”’
“If H.R. 5 becomes law, Beck warned, “male rapists will go to women’s prisons and likely assault female inmates as has already happened in the U.K.; female survivors of rape will be unable to contest male presence in women’s shelters; men will dominate women’s sports.”
“There’s no way to know if someone’s lying about being transgender because there’s no evidence,” Beck argued. “There is no evidence of gender identity. It’s not a material reality at all (link alternate link).”
Beck’s video testimony available here.
Ironically, the Equality Act inspires coalition of Feminists, Religious liberty advocates and, apparently, Pro-life activists; see for instance link.
— — — — — — —
3. The Hyde Amendment
“President Biden supports repealing the Hyde Amendment (link)”
Reversal of prior position:
“Joseph R. Biden Jr. reversed himself…on one of the issues most important to Democratic voters…Mr. Biden’s campaign had said he supported the measure, known as the Hyde Amendment…His turnaround was abrupt, particularly because Mr. Biden has grappled for decades with his views on abortion rights. While he has said he supports Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruling that made abortion legal nationwide, he has opposed members of his own party on a number of abortion measures, ascribing his reluctance to his Roman Catholic faith (link).”
Conflict with Catholic Church:
“The Rev. Robert Morey said Monday that the 2020 Democratic presidential candidate attended Mass at Saint Anthony Catholic Church in Florence and was refused the sacrament because any “public figure who advocates for abortion places himself or herself outside of Church teaching (link).”
Description of the amendment:
“The Hyde Amendment effectively prevents federal funding from being used to pay for abortions — with very limited exceptions — via any programs that are administered by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)….The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Henry Hyde (R, Illinois), was enacted in 1976, and although it has never become a permanent law, Congress has renewed it annually for the last four decades, attaching it as a rider to HHS appropriations bills….The only exceptions under the Hyde Amendment are cases involving rape or incest, or when the mother’s life is in danger (link).”
Critical view via Planned Parenthood:
“Since 1976, the Hyde Amendment has blocked federal Medicaid funding for abortion services (since 1994, there have been three extremely narrow exceptions: when continuing the pregnancy will endanger the patient’s life, or when the pregnancy results from rape or incest). This means Medicaid cannot cover abortion even when a patient’s health is at risk and their doctor recommends they get an abortion…the Hyde Amendment is particularly harmful to people with low incomes, people of color, young people and immigrants — who all disproportionately rely on Medicaid for their health care coverage… Thanks to the Hyde Amendment, when someone has made the personal decision to end a pregnancy but cannot afford to, they may forgo basic necessities such as heat and electricity in order to save the required funds. They may even resort to self-inducing an abortion or obtaining an abortion from an untrained or unlicensed practitioner (link).”
Supportive view:
“The Hyde Amendment has had bipartisan support in Congress and widespread consensus as a sound and important policy during the post-Roe era for more than four decades…The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the Hyde Amendment:
‘The funding restrictions of the Hyde Amendment do not impinge on the “liberty” protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment held in Roe v. Wade…the Supreme Court held in Maher v. Roe that Roe v. Wade does not establish a woman’s right to a free abortion (link).’”
(SCOTUS Decision Harris v. McRae, 1980, emphasis added.)
“The Hyde Amendment is a critical protection for the freedom of conscience of Americans…if the Hyde Amendment is repealed, every American will become involved in abortions through the use of our tax dollars. For those of us who believe every life is precious no matter the circumstances, the consequences are dire. Taxpayer money may be used for things various Americans disagree with all the time, but decades of bipartisan support for the Hyde Amendment reveal that questions of ending a vulnerable human life are something different altogether (link).”
— — — — — — —
4. Religious Liberty
Note intersections with above regarding abortion, freedom exercise religion interacting with LGBT rights, school choice etc.
Conscience Protections
Biden stance, ca. 2012:
“With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear: No religious institution, Catholic or otherwise — including Catholic Social Services, Georgetown Hospital, Mercy, any hospital — none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide,” Biden said. “That is a fact (link).”
Biden declaration reversing above stance, post-SCOTUS decision Pennsylvania v. Little Sisters of the Poor, 2020:
“Hours after the Little Sisters of the Poor won — again — at the Supreme Court on Wednesday, Joe Biden pledged to fight like hell to roll back conscience protections for Catholic nuns and other religious employers who object to providing contraceptives (link).”
“I am disappointed in today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision that will make it easier for the Trump-Pence Administration to continue to strip health care from women — attempting to carve out broad exemptions to the Affordable Care Act’s commitment to giving all women free access to recommended contraception…If I am elected, I will restore the Obama-Biden policy that existed before the Hobby Lobby ruling: providing an exemption for houses of worship and an accommodation for nonprofit organizations with religious missions. The accommodation will allow women at these organizations to access contraceptive coverage, not through their employer-provided plan, but instead through their insurance company or a third-party administrator (link).”
Little Sisters of the Poor Case:
“On October 1, 2019, the Little Sisters of the Poor asked the Supreme Court to protect them from the HHS contraceptive mandate again and end their legal battle once and for all….On July 8, 2020 the Supreme Court ruled 7–2 in favor of the Little Sisters of the Poor, allowing them to continue serving the elderly poor and dying without threat of millions of dollars in fines. Writing for the Court, Justice Thomas said that “For over 150 years, the Little Sisters have engaged in faithful service and sacrifice, motivated by a religious calling to surrender all for the sake of their brother. . . . But for the past seven years, they — like many other religious objectors who have participated in the litigation and rulemakings leading up to today’s decision — have had to fight for the ability to continue in their noble work without violating their sincerely held religious beliefs (link).”
Accommodation point of contention:
‘The sticking point for both sides is a waiver/authorization form that the Little Sisters must fill out to take advantage of a so-called accommodation for non-profit ministries. The form, however, has a dual purpose — it signals opposition to the mandate, but also authorizes a third-party to provide the services it finds morally objectionable…The Little Sisters and other applicants cannot execute the form because they cannot deputize a third party to sin on their behalf,” stated the Becket Fund (link).’
Catholic Concerns
Biden website declares:
“I’m a practicing Catholic. I believe faith is a gift. And the first obligation we all have is, ‘Love your God,’ the second one is, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ … ‘Treat people with dignity.’ Everyone’s entitled to dignity, that’s a basic tenet in my household (link).”
Policy proposals list following at above site addressing ‘Catholic concerns:’
- Build an economy where everyone comes along and we protect the “least of these;”
- Respect the dignity of work and give workers back the power to earn what they’re worth;
- Ensure that affordable, quality health care is a right for all Americans;
- Pursue a humane immigration policy that keeps families together, strengthens our economy, and secures our border;
- Serve as stewards of our creation and protect our planet against climate change.
Notably, no religious liberty concerns (see above re: Equality Act, Hyde Amendment, etc.) are addressed. The Biden policy proposals completely ignore an apparently overwhelming concern of the Catholic Church regarding current politics:
“It is the teaching of the Catholic Church from the very beginning…that the killing of an unborn child is always intrinsically evil and can never be justified. If those who perform an abortion and those who cooperate willingly in the action are fully aware of the objective evil of what they do, they are guilty of grave sin (link).”
— — — — — — —
5) Social Justice / Critical Theory
Biden vision invokes ‘Diversity’ and ‘Equity’ as aim of policies:
“Achieve Equity in Management, Training, and Higher Education Opportunities Connected to the Jobs of the Future (link).”
Such policy extends across myriad sectors of society including but not limited to
Education:
“Stark racial disparities exist at every stage of our education system. These disparities compound and contribute to inequity in economic, health, housing, and criminal justice outcomes (link).”
Government:
“Promote Diversity and Accountability in Leadership Across Key Positions in All Federal Agencies (link).”
Industry (Agriculture, Energy):
“Address Longstanding Inequities in Agriculture” and “Ensure Equity in Biden’s Bold Infrastructure and Clean Energy Investments (link).”
Biden accepts hypothesis of ‘Systemic Racism’ as the underlying social ill:
“The bottom line is we have a lot to root out, but most of all the systematic racism that most of us whites don’t like to acknowledge even exists,” Biden said at an event hosted by the Rev. Al Sharpton and the National Action Network. “We don’t even consciously acknowledge it. But it’s been built into every aspect of our system (link).”
Claims above referenced systemic racism is the root cause of societal issues further demanding a single ethnic group is responsible:
“Because when your schools are substandard, when your houses are undervalued, when your car insurance costs more for no apparent reason, when poverty rates for black Americans is still twice that of white Americans, … there’s something we have to admit. Not you — we — White America has to admit there’s a still a systematic racism. And it goes almost unnoticed by so many of us (link).”
From the Biden website:
“Tackle systemic racism and support a study of the continuing impacts of slavery. We must acknowledge that there can be no realization of the American dream without grappling with the original sin of slavery, and the centuries-long campaign of violence, fear, and trauma wrought upon African American people in this country. As Biden has said in this campaign, a Biden Administration will support a study of reparations. Biden will begin on day one of his Administration to address the systemic racism that persists across our institutions today. That’s why he developed education, climate change, and health care policies, among others, that will root out this systemic racism (link).”
Reinstatement of Obama-Era Policies
Biden declarations indicate intent return to previous policies:
“Reinstate the Obama-Biden Administration’s actions to diversify our schools. As President, Biden will reinstate the Department of Education guidance (link).”
Obama-era policy linked at Biden website:
“Advancing Diversity and Inclusion in Higher Education (link)”
Proposal detailed at the Biden website stated in conjunction with Bernie Sanders, e.g., the ‘Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force Recommendations’ (link), where they propose the following:
“Protecting Communities by Reforming our Criminal Justice System”
“We can end the era of mass incarceration and dramatically reduce the number of Americans held in jails and prisons while continuing to reduce crime rates…This is the moment to root out systemic racism in our criminal justice system and our society.”
“We must start by preventing people from entering the criminal justice system in the first place…We support re-issuing federal guidance from the Department of Education and the Department of Justice to prevent the disparate disciplinary treatment of children of color in school and educational settings.”
“The federal government will incentivize states to stop incarcerating kids and develop community-based alternatives to prison and detention centers for youth and invest in after-school programs, community centers, and summer jobs to provide opportunities for young people at risk.”
The Obama-era guidance issued ca. 2014 stated (link):
“Even though incidents of school violence have decreased overall…Schools can improve safety by making sure that climates are welcoming and that responses to misbehavior are fair, non-discriminatory and effective…students of color and with disabilities are disproportionately impacted.”
‘U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan: “Positive discipline policies can help create safer learning environments without relying heavily on suspensions and expulsions. Schools also must understand their civil rights obligations and avoid unfair disciplinary practices. We need to keep students in class where they can learn.”’
‘Attorney General Eric Holder said. “This guidance will promote fair and effective disciplinary practices that will make schools safe, supportive and inclusive for all students.’
The Obama guidance threatened non-compliant schools with enforcement of civil rights laws if racial disparities in disciplinary measures emerge:
“The Department of Justice enforces Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race or national origin in public schools, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin by schools (link).”
Obama-era guidance cited as cause for increased violence at schools (article ca 2017):
“Reforms in St. Paul, Minn. had gone awry, Ramey County attorney John Choi noted that the number of assaults against school staff tripled from 2014 to 2015, terming it a ‘public health crisis.’”
“In Tampa Bay, Fla., 66% of teachers said that the new policy did not make schools more orderly. In Santa Ana, Calif., as well, 66% of teachers said the new system was not working. In Denver, Colo., 75% of teachers said that the new system did not improve student behavior. In Madison, Wis., only 13% of teachers thought that discipline reform was having a positive effect. But in Baton Rouge, La., 60% of teachers said there was an increase in violence or violent threats from students, and in Syracuse, N.Y., two-thirds of teachers said they were worried about their safety at work.”
“After the federal government pressured Oklahoma City to revise its discipline policies, one teacher…said teachers “were told that referrals would not require suspension unless there was blood.” In Buffalo, Marc Bruno, a teacher who got kicked in the head by a student said: “We have fights here almost every day…. The kids walk around and say, ‘We can’t get suspended — we don’t care what you say.’”
“Some administrators…would rather ignore the behavior to get their suspension numbers down (link).”
Obama-era guidance cited as influence leading to shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Broward County, Florida, on February 14, 2018 (link):
“Federal guidelines for school discipline in a 2014 ‘Dear Colleague’ letter are similar to Broward County’s policies.”
“In 2013, Broward County School District, home to two of Cruz’s [the shooter’s] former schools — Stoneman Douglas High School and Westglades Middle School — launched a high-profile school-safety program, Preventing Recidivism through Opportunities, Mentoring, Interventions, Support & Education (PROMISE). PROMISE received national attention, including praise from the Obama Administration.”
“In 2014, Broward Superintendent Robert Runcie told Scholastic.com, ‘Some of my staff joke that the Obama administration might have taken our policies and framework and developed them into national guidelines…. What we’ve got is very aligned with that. We went out early on.’”
Despite an established pattern of behaviour by perpetrator, the policy in-place failed to prevent the shooting:
“According to a Washington Post timeline, Cruz left Westglades Middle School with a record that included 26 ‘disciplinary incidents.’ In 2016, while enrolled at Douglas High School, he made a threat online saying he “planned to shoot up the school.’”
‘“Despite years of misbehavior, Cruz was never arrested or expelled, according to the Miami Herald. CNN reports that law enforcement received 45 calls between 2008 and 2017 “related to the Cruz home, Nikolas Cruz or his brother (link).”’
The above pattern of ‘ignoring the behaviour’ is consistent with the Broward County and Obama-era Guidance policies. These are the same policies Biden proposes reinstatement of — not only in education but — across all sectors of society.
— — — — — — —
Addendum to Item (5) Ideology of Critical Theory & Social Justice
Diversity, Inclusion, Equity terms with superficial appeal, yet actual meanings in practice substantially different. Note:
Diversity:
Knowledge is entirely viewpoint-valid such that identity groups have special revelation for their experiences as a group. If their group is identified as an oppressed group, then their knowledge is necessarily superior and further utterly inaccessible to oppressor groups Diversity in this context is the explicit effort at achieving ‘equity’ defined below by the mechanism of including the marginalised viewpoint held by the oppressed and excluding the privileged held by the oppressors (see inclusion or link for more).
Inclusion:
Aimed at insulating or isolating groups from perceived oppression. This informs any efforts at protecting the oppressed groups and may lead to silencing, exclusion or outright verbal or even physical confrontation of presumed oppressive groups. Ironically, then, consistent with the overall aim of ‘equity’ (see below), inclusivity may result in discrimination and exclusivity (see link for more).
Equity:
Founded on an idealogical perspective of society comprised of competing classes, or identity groups, forever locked in struggles for power. Those currently in dominance (the privileged) are claimed to assert their power through societal and institutionalised oppression. The oppressed groups (the marginalised) must be liberated and paid reparations for the injustice afflicted by oppressors. The mechanism prescribed here is ‘equity.’ If presumed oppressor groups are treated literally unfairly, this is not considered technically unjust due to guilt for their presumed oppression and is simply a feature of the process of “marginalising the privileged and privileging the marginalised (see link for more).”
Critical Theory ideology is foundational to above concepts, e.g., post-modernist philosophical principles fused with neo-Marxist concepts of social power dynamics. Very briefly these principles are:
1) Knowledge principle
— Objective knowledge is essentially unobtainable; there are only relativistic ‘Truths’ or only subjective realities.
— Cultural constructivism constrains what is knowable particularly through language.
Caveat:
The Only Objective Reality or Truth is Cultural / Ethnic Identity and Oppression.
2) Power Principle
— Society is formed of systems of power and hierarchies
— Said hierarchy utilises principles of (1) to
— manipulate what is known and
— perpetuate oppressive power dynamics (e.g., language is oppressive).
Social Justice in turn operates on these principles — hinging on identity politics that those suffering oppression must be liberated by way of dismantling this ‘unjust’ system. It is Theorised that all Western Liberal societies suffer said immoral structures, and the Critical aspect demands eternal criticism (e.g.., problematization) and activism (e.g., disruption and dismantling) based on said presumptions.
As noted from Cynical Theories (Lindsay & Pluckrose, 2020, link):
“We hear the language of critical race Theory from activists in all walks of life, and one could be easily forgiven…for thinking that critical race Theory sounds rather racist itself, in ascribing profound failures of morals and character to white people…We are told that racism is embedded in culture and that we cannot escape it. We hear that white people are inherently racist. We are told that racism is ‘prejudice plus power’ therefore only white people can be racist. We are informed that only people of color can talk about racism, that white people need to just listen, and that they don’t have the ‘racial stamina’ to engage it. We hear that not seeing people in terms of their race (being color-blind) is, in fact, racist and an attempt to ignore the pervasive racism that dominates society and perpetuates white privilege.”
Racial Disparities and Systemic Racism
Ideological premises of Critical Theory / Social Justice demand racial disparities (e.g., mismatches between ethnicity outcome proportions and population demographics) must be due to racism — particularly systemic. The Biden-Sanders Unity Task-Force Recommendation states (link):
Racial Equity
“We need a comprehensive agenda for communities of color with ambition that matches the scale of the challenge and with recognition that race-neutral policies are not a sufficient response to race-based disparities. We need proactive anti-discrimination detection and enforcement…We are committed to taking anti-racist actions for equity across our institutions, including in the areas of education, climate change, criminal justice, immigration, and health care, among others…The over- policing of communities of color, the criminalization of poverty, and historic and ongoing injustices against sovereign Tribal nations contribute to racial gaps in wealth and income…[we] prioritize closing the racial wealth gap by lowering disparities in employment rates and compensation, health care outcomes, homeownership, and business ownership.”
Issues of racial disparity and discrimination and the principle presumption of racism as the root cause criticised at great length. Moroever demands of equality of outcome is — due to the intrinsic diversity of human beings and elements beyond human control— impossible:
“The idea that the world would be a level playing field, if it were not for either genes or discrimination, is a preconception in defiance of both logic and facts…Nothing is easier to find than sins among human beings, but to automatically make those sins the sole, or even primary, cause of different outcomes among different peoples is to ignore many other reasons for those disparities. Geography and demography, for example, are among the many factors that make equal or random outcomes among human beings very unlikely.”
Discrimination and Disparity, Thomas Sowell, 2019 (link).
